We went into admin and Bates got away with paying 1p in the pound. One of the stipulations was that if we return to the premier league within 5 years he has to pay a further 15p in the pound. Now on an £80 million debt I make that £12 million to pay if we get promoted before the end of this season. Since administration we have: Sold Fab Delph 5 Million Received Compensation from Chelsea of £5m (Taiwo & Woods) received 1 Million from Everton for Luke Garbutt Kasper £1.5m Healy - undisclosed. TOTAL £12.5+ Million At the end of our first season in Div one Bates bragged that we were one of the few teams to make a profit that season excluding sales. Cup games against Spurs, Liverpool, Man U and Arsenal brought in a reported £6 million Promotion to the Championship last year, increased gates (£? how much) and an extra £3 million in TV revenue... If we made a profit in Div 1 we cannot have failed to make a much larger one in the Championship
Bates actually paid 11.2p in the pound, after the 1p was rejected - per KPMG letter to creditors dated 24July 2007. The debt was £30m not £80m (again per KPMG letter). If Leeds get into the Premier league before the 2017/18 season, then there is a contingent liability of £4.75m (was £5m but they settled one early) - information from the latest annual accounts. Taiwo and Woods were in 2006 - before the Admin. Leeds also have to pay £1.5m add ons if we reach Premier or players make certain number of appearances - per annual accounts. Leeds did not make any trading profit - but a loss. Profit only after player sales. This was a surprise as Bates had said the breakeven is 22k attendance and getting knocked out in the first round of the cup compettions - and we know we did better than that.
thanks middlesex....just proves that people and their 'facts' are often dubious and interpreted to suit the posters agenda
Bates and co have been milking the club ever since administration. massive amounts going out in 'consultants fees' for what. massive ammounts paid out to Mark taylor who is the club solicitor and gets well paid anyway, so you can assume that's his legal charges for managing the offshore trusts. The acounts are bland and opaque, but money leaving hand over fist, and Bates legal bill was £3m for the Levi debacle that he could have settled for £65k, he wouldn't so got shafted, but hang on why is the club liable, it was Bates who did it not the club
Middlesex Bates Saying we break even at 22000, with no cup runs. We then average over 25000, play liverpool, spurs (2) and man u and we then post a loss We did bates get it so wrong ???
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/leeds_united/6727329.stm states 1p in the pound, apologise refarding the 80 million, although now I have read £35 million. No matter how you look at it Leeds are making a healthy profit season after season and fee's received for players are not being ploughed back into the team. I have no agenda, I love Leeds with a passion but I have my eyes open and I can see what Bates is doing to the club and team that I love
http://www.lufctalk.com/forums/index.php?topic=3610 a couple of others with the same set of figures (near enough) that I also read...
Doc, do you know for a fact that the club paid the Levi costs? I did not see anything in the 2010 accounts which show this was the case. Also the costs were estimated at £1.5m (Guardian dated 2nd July 2009). I do agree that the accounts are opaque - that is one of the "privileges" of being a private limited company - you do not have to disclose much. And one does wonder what the remaining £8m (total admin costs of £22m less wages etc of £14m) are for.
LIW, I agree - that is why I said it was a surprise that we did not make better profits. Also my comments about the unaccounted for £8m in the 2010 accounts in my last comment. Ristac, there were a lot of numbers bandied about - I am quoting from the legal documents (not saying that these are 100% accurate!). I will always try and give information as to where I have my information from - and try to ensure that these are reliable sources. Like you, I too have no agenda and like you, love Leeds and was gutted on Saturday. I had only got back in the morning from Houston and although only a short trip to Southampton, felt that I had made a bigger effort than the players out there. But will still be making the 400mile round trip on Saturday for the first home game of the season.
They are interesting figures, but don't support some of the previous arguments on 606 that Bates doesn't want promotion to the PL to avoid the additional creditor payments. It's pretty much agreed that promotion to the PL is worth £80M or so (inc any parachute payments if you go down) which more than covers any additional legal business.
Middlesex, the total legal bid for the failed Levi case was almost £3.5m. Bates was found guilty and had to pay levi damages, plus levi's legal bill which was substantial. On top of that bates had his own legal bills, and bates is a pro at litigation because he usually wins, but the last 2 cases he's been shafted big time and had some payback for a change. Even levi came out and said he had offered to settle for £65k before it went to trial, because all he wanted was an apology, but Bates being the big mouthed cockney I am, decided to tell him to stuff it, which cost over £3m. The bill won't have come out of Bates pockets, and you know it, but because theres so many grey areas within the accounts for consultants fees, legal fees and admin fees all which total millions. You have to wonder at the £19m which the administrators failed to see in the books, which destroyed any of the bids that were on the table. This debt from FSF which came at the 12th hour killed any chance of us getting a CVA, which also forced the other bids on the table to walk away, which only left the bates team and FSF insisted that they would forget about the owed £19m as long as bates got the gig. There should have been a forensic audit of the books right then and there, because a dodgy coup had just taken place
Doc's got it right. The only reason Bates got in charge anyway is because of his crooked business. I hope the BBC actually do this documentry, despite Ken banning them, and a full investigation is done into it.
